“Cradle-to-grave” treatment of leaks begins with technicians logging leakage signal strengths and GPS latitude and longitude coordinates in technicians' vehicles as the technicians go about their daily assignments. leakage signal strengths and GPS latitude and longitude coordinates are then uploaded to a leakage server. The server calculates leak latitude and longitude coordinates and signal strengths. The system sends the leakage signal strengths and/or calculated leak latitude and longitude coordinates to technicians' vehicles, for example, as components of, or attachments to, work orders. The latitudes and longitudes are converted by GPS navigators in the technicians' vehicles to turn-by-turn directions to the calculated leak locations. The technicians drive to the leaks, identify and repair them, and close the work orders.
  
		  
  |   
		 
			 1.  A method for repairing signal leakage from a catv network, the method comprising traversing an area served by the catv network, measuring leakage signal strengths, identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, storing the measured leakage signal strengths and latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, transferring the measured leakage signal strengths and corresponding latitude and longitude coordinates to a computer, calculating leak latitude and longitude coordinates and signal strengths on the computer from the transferred leakage signal strengths and latitude and longitude coordinates, transferring the calculated leak locations to technicians' vehicles, converting the calculated leak locations in the technicians' vehicles to turn-by-turn directions to the calculated leak locations, following the turn-by-turn directions to the leaks, and repairing the leaks
 
			  
			  
			  wherein measuring leakage signal strengths, identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, storing the measured leakage signal strengths and latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, and transferring the measured leakage signal strengths and corresponding latitude and longitude coordinates to a computer comprises making leakage measurements, making latitude and longitude measurements, associating each leakage measurement with a respective latitude and longitude measurement, creating a data base of associated leakage measurement and respective latitude and longitude measurement, selecting from the data base a number of leakage measurements, multiplying the selected leakage measurements times a first locus of points on which a leakage signal associated with that respective leakage measurement may be assumed to reside to develop a number of relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude; solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude for a second locus of points common to the first pair; solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude for a third locus of points common to the second pair, projecting the second and third loci onto a common surface, and determining the intersection of the second and third loci on the common surface. 
2.  The method according to  
3.  The method of  
4.  The method of  
5.  The method of  
6.  The method of  
7.  The method of  
8.  The method of  
9.  The method of  
			  
			 | 
	|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 11/742,184 filed Apr. 30, 2007. U.S. Ser. No. 11/742,184 claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) of the Aug. 7, 2006 filing date of U.S. Ser. No. 60/836,036. The complete disclosures of both U.S. Ser. No. 11/742,184 and U.S. Ser. No. 60/836,036 are incorporated herein in their entireties by reference.
This invention relates to methods for determining the location of leakage from, for example, CATV cables, taps, fittings, drops and other CATV plant facilities.
According to an aspect of the invention, a method of determining the location of a leakage signal from a network includes measuring at various times and locations leakage believed to be associated with the leakage signal. The method further includes constructing a data base of leakages and associated locations, selecting from the data base a number of leakage values, and multiplying the selected leakage signal values times a first locus of points on which a leakage signal associated with a respective signal strength may be assumed to reside to develop a number of relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location. The method further includes solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a second locus of common points to the first pair, solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a third locus of common points to the second pair, projecting the second and third loci onto a common surface, and determining the intersection of the second and third loci on the common surface.
Illustratively according to this aspect, identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured comprises identifying latitude and longitude coordinates using a positioning or geolocation system.
Illustratively according to this aspect, the method further includes determining the strength of the leakage signal by substituting the intersection of the second and third loci on the common surface back into a selected relationship among leakage signal strength, leakage and location and solving for the strength of the leakage signal.
Illustratively according to this aspect, solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a second locus of common points to the first pair and solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a third locus of common points to the second pair together comprise selecting a location about which the solutions are to be normalized and solving the first and second pairs of the relationships about the location about which the solutions are to be normalized.
Illustratively according to this aspect, solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a second locus of common points to the first pair and solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a third locus of common points to the second pair, and projecting the second and third loci onto a common surface together comprise converting an angular distance into a linear distance. Illustratively according to this aspect, converting an angular distance into a linear distance comprises using a table to convert an angular distance into a linear distance.
Illustratively according to this aspect, converting an angular distance into a linear distance comprises calculating a linear distance from an angular distance. Illustratively according to this aspect, measuring at various times and locations leakage believed to be associated with the leakage signal comprises intermittently measuring at various locations leakage believed to be associated with the leakage signal.
Illustratively according to this aspect, measuring at various times and locations leakage believed to be associated with the leakage signal comprises periodically measuring at various locations leakage believed to be associated with the leakage signal.
According to another aspect of the invention, a method for repairing signal leakage from a CATV network comprises traversing an area served by the CATV network, measuring leakage signal strengths, identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, and storing the measured leakage signal strengths and latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured. The method further includes transferring the measured leakage signal strengths and corresponding latitude and longitude coordinates to a computer, calculating leak latitude and longitude coordinates and signal strengths on the computer from the transferred leakage signal strengths and latitude and longitude coordinates, transferring the calculated leak locations to technicians, dispatching the technicians to repair the leaks, and repairing the leaks.
Illustratively according to this aspect, identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured comprises identifying latitude and longitude coordinates using a positioning or geolocation system.
Illustratively according to this aspect, measuring leakage signal strengths, identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, storing the measured leakage signal strengths and latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage signal strengths are measured, and transferring the measured leakage signal strengths and corresponding latitude and longitude coordinates to a computer comprises making leakage measurements, making latitude and longitude measurements, associating each leakage measurement with a respective latitude and longitude measurement, creating a data base of associated leakage measurement and respective latitude and longitude measurement, selecting from the data base a number of leakage measurements, multiplying the selected leakage measurements times a first locus of points on which a leakage signal associated with that respective leakage measurement may be assumed to reside to develop a number of relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude, solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude for a second locus of points common to the first pair, solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude for a third locus of points common to the second pair, projecting the second and third loci onto a common surface, and determining the intersection of the second and third loci on the common surface.
Illustratively according to this aspect, the method further includes determining the strength of the leakage signal by substituting the intersection of the second and third loci on the common surface back into a selected relationship among relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude and solving for leakage signal strength.
Illustratively according to this aspect, solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude for a second locus of points common to the first pair and solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage measurement, latitude and longitude for a third locus of points common to the second pair together comprise selecting a latitude and longitude about which the solutions are to be normalized and solving the first and second pairs of relationships about the latitude and longitude about which the solutions are to be normalized.
Illustratively according to this aspect, solving a first pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a second locus of common points to the first pair and solving a second pair of these relationships among leakage signal strength, leakage and location for a third locus of common points to the second pair, and projecting the second and third loci onto a common surface together comprise converting an angular distance into a linear distance.
Illustratively according to this aspect, converting an angular distance into a linear distance comprises using a table to convert an angular distance into a linear distance.
Illustratively according to this aspect, converting an angular distance into a linear distance comprises calculating a linear distance from an angular distance.
Illustratively according to this aspect, measuring leakage and identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage is measured comprises intermittently measuring leakage and identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage is measured.
Illustratively according to this aspect, measuring leakage and identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where leakage is measured comprises periodically measuring leakage and identifying latitude and longitude coordinates where the leakage is measured.
The invention may best be understood by referring to the following detailed description and accompanying drawings which illustrate the invention. In the drawings:
Leakage measurements of signal from a CATV plant including, for example, CATV cables, taps, fittings, drops and other CATV plant facilities, may readily be made by, for example, CATV system employees during their conduct of their daily activities. Such leakage measurements, stored in leakage measurement equipment of the type described in, for example, Trilithic Seeker™ GPS leakage management system available from Trilithic, Inc., 9710 Park Davis Drive, Indianapolis, Ind. 46235, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, are uploaded from such CATV system employee equipment into a server at a CATV headend, for example, at the ends of the employees' shifts. Such CATV system employees' daily activities may include, for example, visiting subscriber sites to conduct maintenance and repairs, driving the CATV system to log leakage levels, and so on.
This activity can provide a database of cable system leakage strengths measured at multiple locations, which can be determined with considerable accuracy by associating with each such measurement a location, such as a latitude and longitude provided by a positioning or geolocation system, such as a Global Positioning System (GPS) device. Such data sets might look like the following Table I when sorted in order of descending detected leakage level and eliminating leakage levels below a certain threshold (10 μV in this example):
 
TABLE I 
 
 
 
 
 Leakage (μV or other 
 
Latitude 
Longitude 
suitable dimension) 
 
 
 
39.502145° 
−85.594748° 
26 
 
39.502003° 
−85.594720° 
23 
 
39.502089° 
−85.594722° 
21 
 
39.502066° 
−85.594746° 
20 
 
39.502131° 
−85.595057° 
19 
 
39.502223° 
−85.594751° 
16 
 
39.502210° 
−85.595003° 
16 
 
39.502188° 
−85.595096° 
16 
 
39.502183° 
−85.595142° 
16 
 
39.502208° 
−85.594939° 
15 
 
39.502011° 
−85.594726° 
14 
 
39.502145° 
−85.594750° 
14 
 
39.502303° 
−85.594753° 
13 
 
39.502054° 
−85.594725° 
13 
 
39.502196° 
−85.595049° 
13 
 
39.502172° 
−85.595028° 
13 
 
39.502095° 
−85.594724° 
12 
 
39.502094° 
−85.595056° 
12 
 
39.502182° 
−85.595002° 
12 
 
39.502194° 
−85.594972° 
12 
 
39.502098° 
−85.594727° 
11 
 
39.502175° 
−85.594723° 
11 
 
39.502226° 
−85.594959° 
11 
 
39.502226° 
−85.594959° 
11 
 
39.502181° 
−85.595188° 
11 
 
39.502067° 
−85.595321° 
11 
 
39.502062° 
−85.595106° 
11 
 
39.502063° 
−85.594713° 
11 
 
39.502175° 
−85.594727° 
10 
 
39.502114° 
−85.595058° 
10 
 
39.502146° 
−85.595055° 
10 
 
39.502160° 
−85.595045° 
10 
 
 
Using this data, which, again, is typically extracted from a larger data set accumulated over days, weeks, months, etc., of data collection and then sorted and limited by differences of latitude and longitude from the largest system leak in the list, the location and magnitude of a leakage source giving rise to this data may be isolated. The method employs leakage signal strength versus distance considerations.
Leakage detectors and their associated antenna systems are calibrated to be accurate at a fixed distance from a radiation source, such as the source of a leak. It is not uncommon in the CATV industry to use three meters as a measurement standard. So, in the case of a 10 μV/m leak, for example, which is calibrated to be accurate at a distance of three meters from the leakage source, a leak indicated as having a strength of 10 μV/m could reside anywhere on a radius three meters from the leakage antenna. If the leakage strength were doubled to 20 μV/m and the antenna were six meters from the source, the leakage detecting instrument would still indicate a leakage signal strength of 10 μV/m. So, for a given measured 10 μV/m leak, one can envision an inverted cone of potential leakage sources and leakage signal strengths which would all give rise to the same 10 μV/m reading at the location of the leakage detecting antenna, with the x and y dimensions of the cone being the longitude and latitude of the cone's surface at various points and z being the indicated strength of the leakage signal. In this example, there is a three meter circle of potential 10 μV/m leaks around the leakage antenna, a six meter circle of 20 μV/m leaks, a nine meter circle of 30 μV/m leaks, and so on in circles of increasing radius at increasing heights (z values) corresponding to increasing leakage signal strength. If one imagines the location for this 10 μV/m reading on the leakage detector to be defined by latitude and longitude coordinates with x mapping to longitude, y mapping to latitude and z mapping to leakage level, then the increasing circles around the current location of the leakage detector can be visualized as a cone standing on its apex. Every leak stored in the database can be represented in this way with its apex at the GPS-determined position of the antenna at the time the particular leakage signal strength is measured. The equation for each leakage cone may then be written as:
z=L1sqrt((x−x1)2+(y−y1)2)
where sqrt is the square root operator;
For purposes of this discussion, zn will indicate the nth detected leak. Using (arbitrarily) the first four rows of the above data set, the following four equations are obtained:
z1=L1sqrt((x−x1)2+(y−y1)2);
z2=L2sqrt((x−x2)2+(y−y2)2);
z3=L3sqrt((x−x3)2+(y−y3)2); and,
z4=L4sqrt((x−x4)2+(y−y4)2),
where xn, yn and zn are the longitude, latitude and leakage signal strength displayed in the nth row of the above table, and
L1=26/3 μV/m;
L2=23/3 μV/m;
L3=21/3 μV/m; and
L4=20/3 μV/m,
using the above convention, leakage signal strength detected at three meters from the leakage antenna. From the above Table I:
x1=−85.594748°;
x2=−85.594720°;
x3=−85.594722°;
x4=−85.594746°;
y1=39.502145°;
y2=39.502003°;
y3=39.502089°; and,
y4=39.502066°.
If the intersection of two adjacent inverted cones, for example, z1 and z2, is plotted, the intersection is an arc 20, as illustrated in 
Again, looking into any of these cones z1, z2, z3, z4 from above, at any given leakage signal strength (that is, any vertical elevation), it may be visualized as a circle. In 
Now that a specific x and y, that is, longitude and latitude, of interest have been identified, those values can be substituted back into any one of the equations above for z1, z2, z3 or z4 to calculate the strength of the leak at that x and y. For purposes of illustration, the equation for z1 will be used to demonstrate this. First, the differences (y−y1) and (x−x1) in latitude and longitude need to be converted into meters. Tables stored in instruments such as the above-mentioned server at a CATV headend, a separate computer associated therewith, or calculators provided in such instruments, or some combination of these, are used for these conversions, since such conversions depend upon the latitudes and longitudes which are the subjects of the calculations, that is, upon the curvature of the earth's surface at the latitudes and longitudes of interest. See, for example, http://www.csgnetwork.com/degreelenllavcalc.html, for such a calculator.
z1=(26/3)sqrt((x+85.594748°)2+(y−39.502145°)2);
z2=(23/3)sqrt((x+85.594720°)2+(y−39.502003°)2);
z3=(21/3)sqrt((x+85.594722°)2+(y−39.502089°)2); and,
z4=(20/3)sqrt((x+85.594746°)2+(y−39.502066°)2).
The longitudes and latitudes are normalized to coordinates which lie fairly centrally among them, in this case, −85.594735°, 39.502070°. See 
z1=(26/3)sqrt((0.000013°)2+(−0.000075°)2);
z2=(23/3)sqrt((−0.000015°)2+(0.000067°)2);
z3=(21/3)sqrt((−0.000013°)2+(−0.000018°)2); and,
z4=(20/3)sqrt((0.000011°)2+(0.000004°)2),
where, at this latitude and longitude, 14×10−6°≈1.55435 m and 67×10−6°≈5.76273 m at x=−85.594735° and y=39.502070°. Picking z1 and converting the latitude and longitude differences to meters as discussed above yields a leakage strength of about 51.7285 μV/m at the location of the leak.
A more sophisticated method for finding the common intersection point is to project the potential circles of each leakage “cone” onto the common (x, y) plane and create a list of intersection points at which the leakage potential is identical by gradually increasing the radii of the circles and finding the intersection with the matching leakage potential which will effectively project the intersection arc of the cones onto the common (x, y) plane. Once the list of arc points from the first pair of points is obtained, then the same procedure is followed with the second pair of cones. Once both the lists of points are available, the closest two points from each of the sets to each other can readily be determined. Once the closest two points from each of the sets to each other are found, all that need be done is to evenly split the distance between these two single points and create a new composite point. This provides an even more accurate leak location than the line intersection method previously described.
To facilitate the intersection of the arc projections, a further enhancement is to compare the Cartesian angle between the first pair of points to the angle between the second pair of points and ensure that they are such that the lines drawn between the pairs would cross each other.
A further enhancement is to insure that the points being used in the computation are far enough apart that they would not have been generated by a stationary GPS-equipped receiver. In this regard, it is known that a stationary GPS will generate readings indicating different positions over time due to many factors beyond the control of the user and essentially cause GPS “jitter” in the reported position. It is contemplated that this enhancement will also be used in combination with some empirically gathered data which would suggest a maximum distance from the highest value observed that would still likely be the same leakage source. Otherwise, if data were used without regard to a maximum distance, multiple leakage locations could contribute extreme amounts of error to this method of location.
A C code implementation of the complete algorithm including the above enhancements follows.
With reference to 
One key assumption of this method is that it is reasonable within the relatively small distances involved here is that the surface of the earth is essentially flat and that a Cartesian coordinate system is a good approximation for both latitude and longitude in certain portions of the computation. A curved surface model could be created and would perhaps be even more effective, but would take significantly more processing resources than this implementation does. This method has been effectively implemented in a Cortex-M3 processor derivative in a portable instrument in the vehicle and functions in near real time.
Issues exist with respect to GPS and “driveout” (that is, dispatching of a repair technician or the like with directions to the location of a detected or calculated leak) direction and/or location accuracy. The issues include the established fact, illustrated in the following Table II, that a high percentage of leaks discovered in a driveout cannot be found at the address reported by the generally used GPS databases when a technician goes into the field to repair them. Possible reasons include leak address errors due to reverse geocoding limitations and misinterpretation of processed data. With respect to reverse geocoded addresses, one issue is the accuracy of reverse geocoded addresses. Another is whether different mapping services provide different address for the same GPS location. Three suppliers, Bing™, MapQuest®, and Google™ were compared. Parenthetically, MapQuest® is the supplier employed in the system described in this application. In the following descriptions, all addresses are derived from same set of GPS leak coordinates.
The following Table II illustrates the issue, and demonstrates that some addresses vary widely, sometimes even resulting in the different mapping services identifying the same GPS coordinates with different streets. In other instances, the different mapping services identify the same address or nearby (for example, adjacent) addresses for the same GPS coordinates.
 
TABLE II 
 
 
 
GPS and Location Accuracy 
 
BING Address 
MapQuest Address 
Google Address 
 
 
 
25 Pavilion Rd 
32 Village Drive 
16-18 Village Drive 
 
60 Alyce Ln 
85 Alyce Lane 
2 Hopkins Street 
 
52 Borton Ave 
38 Borton Avenue 
48 Borton Avenue 
 
24 Borton Ave 
Old Mill Rd 
67-89 Centennial Blvd 
 
11 Regan Ct 
81 Reagan Court 
10-12 Reagan Court 
 
39 Covington Ln 
37 Covington Lane 
39 Covington Lane 
 
2001 Morris Dr 
2001 Morris Drive 
2000-2002 Morris Drive 
 
122 North Ave 
153 Bethel Avenue 
155 Bethel Avenue 
 
21 S Rose Ln 
14 Holly Drive 
6 Holly Drive 
 
7 Hamilton Ave 
5 Hamilton Avenue 
7 Hamilton Avenue 
 
20 Marshall Ave 
87 Marshall Avenue 
11-99 Marshall Avenue 
 
near 193 Tansboro Rd 
196 Tansboro Road 
200-298 Tansboro Road 
 
near 412 Berlin 
411 Berlin Cross 
410-424 Berlin Cross 
 
Cross Keys Rd 
Keys Road 
Keys Road 
 
near 912 Hainesport 
966 Hainesport 
914 Hainesport 
 
Mt Laurel Rd 
Mt. Laurel 
Mt Laurel 
 
2 Whittier Dr 
8 Easton Way 
9 Easton Way 
 
near 49 Brook Ln 
50 Brook Lane 
28 Willow Brook Way 
 
20 Lenox Dr 
No # Heather Lane 
No Address Match 
 
3 Sailor Ct 
31 Sailor Court 
3 Sailor Court 
 
3 Chase Rd 
3 Chase Road 
No # Chase Road 
 
572 Main St 
574 Main Street 
572 Main Street 
 
near Municipal Dr 
2 Municipal Drive 
1 Municipal Drive 
 
near 29 Calvert Ln 
75 Calvert Lane 
29 Clover Street 
 
 
Additional limits on accuracy confirmed in discussions with the mapping services' technical service departments include universal acknowledgment that addresses are only approximate, that the estimated addresses can differ between map service providers for same GPS coordinates, and that address interpolation can be as great as 10:1, contributing significantly to errors in identifying leakage locations and addresses. When added up, these potential sources of error in address specification yield disagreement on the correct address. As an example of one effect of address interpolation in a real world situation which is illustrated herein, the distance between 2 Whittier Drive, Hainesport, New Jersey and 8 Easton Way, Hainesport, N.J. is about 289 feet (about 88.1 meters). An actual leak location was at 7 Easton Way, across the street from 8 Easton Way, but down the street and around the corner, 289 feet from 2 Whittier Drive, the address identified by one of the mapping services.
In a GPS accuracy assessment, a field experiment was conducted to determine how much GPS location error might be encountered by a repair technician dispatched to investigate and/or repair a leak reported by the method previously described. The experiment started at the coordinates predicted by the system according to the present invention. Then, using the Seeker™ instrument available from Trilithic, Inc., the instrument operator “walked down” (that is, walked along the cable until the leak was isolated and positively identified) the leak location, computed the distance offset, and recorded the nearest actual address. In doing so, Garmin® point-of-interest (hereinafter sometimes POI) files were used rather than estimated addresses. The results of this experiment are illustrated in Table III. Significantly, all leaks were successfully located. Equally importantly, all leaks were found within 25 feet (about 7.6 meters) of their locations predicted by the system according to the invention.
 
TABLE III 
 
 
 
Comparison of Predicted and Actual Leak Locations 
 
 Actual Address 
 
 
 (from Garmin ® POI files) 
Leak Location 
 
 
 
 
 32 Village Drive 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 58 Alyce Lane 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 52 Borton Avenue 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 1 Old Mill Drive 
Dot is on leak 
 
 13 Reagan Court 
Dot is on leak 
 
 37 Covington Lane 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 1916 Morris Drive 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 155 Bethel Avenue 
Dot is on leak 
 
 3 Holly Drive 
Dot is on leak 
 
 7 Hamilton Avenue 
Dot is on leak 
 
 20 Marshall Avenue 
Dot is on leak 
 
 212 Tansboro Road 
Dot is on leak 
 
 417 Berlin Cross Keys Road 
Dot is on leak 
 
 908 Hainesport Mt Laurel 
Dot is on leak 
 
 7 Easton Way 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 26 Brook Lane 
Dot is on leak 
 
 2 Heather Lane 
Dot is on leak 
 
 2 Sailor Court 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 2 Chase Road 
within 25 ft of dot 
 
 568 Main Street 
Dot is on leak 
 
 close enough 
Dot is on leak 
 
 29 Calvert Lane 
Dot is on leak 
 
 
 
Tables II and III are combined in Table IV to illustrate the leak address error problem in a graphical manner.
 
TABLE IV 
 
 
 
BING Address 
MapQuest Address 
Google Address 
Actual Address 
 
 
 
25 Pavilion Rd 
32 Village Drive 
16-18 Village Drive 
32 Village Drive 
 
60 Alyce Ln 
85 Alyce Lane 
2 Hopkins Street 
58 Alyce Lane 
 
52 Borton Ave 
38 Borton Avenue 
48 Borton Avenue 
52 Borton Avenue 
 
24 Borton Ave 
39.84937-74.95699 
67-89 Centennial 
1 Old Mill Drive 
 
 
 Blvd 
 
11 Regan Ct 
81 Reagan Court 
10-12 Reagan Court 
13 Reagan Court 
 
39 Covington Ln 
37 Covington Lane 
39 Covington Lane 
37 Covington Lane 
 
2001 Morris Dr 
2001 Morris Drive 
2000-2002 Morris 
1916 Morris Drive 
 
 
 Drive 
 
122 North Ave 
153 Bethel Avenue 
155 Bethel Avenue 
155 Bethel Avenue 
 
21 S Rose Ln 
14 Holly Drive 
6 Holly Drive 
3 Holly Drive 
 
7 Hamilton Ave 
5 Hamilton Avenue 
7 Hamilton Avenue 
7 Hamilton Avenue 
 
20 Marshall Ave 
87 Marshall Avenue 
11-99 Marshall Avenue 
20 Marshall Avenue 
 
near 193 Tansboro Rd 
196 Tansboro Road 
200-298 Tansboro Road 
212 Tansboro Road 
 
near 412 Berlin 
411 Berlin Cross 
410-424 Berlin 
417 Berlin Cross 
 
Cross Keys Rd 
Keys Road 
Cross Keys Road 
Keys Road 
 
near 912 Hainesport 
966 Hainesport Mt. 
914 Hainesport Mt 
908 Hainesport Mt 
 
Mt Laurel Rd 
Laurel 
Laurel 
Laurel 
 
2 Whittier Dr 
8 Easton Way 
9 Easton Way 
7 Easton Way 
 
near 49 Brook Ln 
50 Brook Lane 
28 Willow Brook Way 
26 Brook Lane 
 
20 Lenox Dr 
No # Heather Lane 
No Address Match 
2 Heather Lane 
 
3 Sailor Ct 
31 Sailor Court 
3 Sailor Court 
2 Sailor Court 
 
3 Chase Rd 
3 Chase Road 
No # Chase Road 
2 Chase Road 
 
572 Main St 
574 Main Street 
572 Main Street 
568 Main Street 
 
near Municipal Dr 
2 Municipal Drive 
1 Municipal Drive 
close enough 
 
near 29 Calvert Ln 
75 Calvert Lane 
29 Clover Street 
29 Calvert Lane 
 
 
The system of the present invention thus provides a GPS “dots on a map” solution to this problem. The system of the present invention provides GPS locations, latitude and longitude coordinates, which are capable of being plotted as dots on a map. The Seeker™ GPS takes a leakage measurement once every second, and attaches latitude and longitude coordinates to the measurement. Over the course of an operator's shift, this results in the generation of many data points which are supplied to a leakage server. The server executes the method described above, resulting in intersections at, or very close to, the actual leakage locations in a cable system. These intersections are plotted on a map of the cable system, thereby providing what essentially amount to driving directions to leaks. Technicians use these driving directions when they are dispatched to repair the leaks. Significant features of the system are that no leakage thresholds are used or needed. The system calculates leakage signal strengths from the signal strengths measured at various latitudes and longitudes over the course of the technician's shift. Additionally, if multiple technicians' vehicles are in service, data from multiple technicians' vehicles may be included in the data used to generate Table I, and thus in the above-described calculations.
Alternatively, GPS can be used to generate dots (that is, locations) on a map, such as a so-called “strand” map of the cable system, and attach the dotted strand map to a repair work order or generate the dotted strand map as a component of the work order. In this scenario, no reliance is placed on reverse geocoding, which, as noted above, can be somewhat unreliable or misleading, although reverse geocoding may be added if it is convenient to do so.
If leakage repair procedures do not allow use of maps, a portable navigation device, such as a Garmin® GPS based navigator, TomTom® GPS based navigator or the like. One or more POI files can be downloaded to a technician's navigation device. Navigation can be “turn-by-turn” with no reference to maps.
The system of the present invention already includes POI file storage and retrieval capability. The system of the present invention thus provides “cradle-to-grave” treatment of leaks. With reference to 
| Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title | 
| 11611740, | Apr 10 2020 | VIAVI SOLUTIONS INC.; Viavi Solutions Inc | Signal leakage monitoring based quality control | 
| 12160558, | Apr 10 2020 | VIAVI SOLUTIONS INC. | Signal leakage monitoring based quality control | 
| 9455766, | Jul 29 2014 | Cable Television Laboratories, Inc | Radio frequency leakage detection in a cable plant | 
| 9729257, | Sep 24 2014 | Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.; Cable Television Laboratories, Inc | Isolating an upstream noise source in a cable television network | 
| 9882663, | Mar 17 2016 | Arcom Digital Patent, LLC | Doppler location of signal leaks in an HFC network | 
| Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title | 
| 3526831, | |||
| 3826306, | |||
| 4060718, | Dec 10 1976 | Litton Systems, Inc. | Geodetic survey method | 
| 4072899, | Apr 26 1976 | Comsonics, Inc. | RF leak detector | 
| 4390836, | Aug 11 1980 | MARATHON OIL COMPANY, A CORP OF OH | Method and apparatus for the detection of pipeline holidays | 
| 4413229, | Jun 02 1981 | Method and apparatus for remote indication of faults in coaxial cable R-F transmission systems | |
| 4612797, | Jun 27 1984 | Rockwell International Corporation | Leak locating and mapping system and method | 
| 4733356, | Dec 14 1984 | Daimler-Benz Aktiengesellschaft | Control device for a vehicle route guidance system | 
| 4775839, | May 21 1985 | Korona Messtechnik Gossau | Control apparatus for the electronic detection in a.c. power transmission lines of fault locations causing power losses | 
| 4810961, | May 17 1988 | Shimizu Construction Co., Ltd. | Radio wave leakage diagnosing system for intelligent building | 
| 4814711, | Apr 05 1984 | Deseret Research, Inc.; DESERET RESEARCH, INC , A CORP OF UT | Survey system and method for real time collection and processing of geophysicals data using signals from a global positioning satellite network | 
| 4857851, | Sep 23 1981 | PIPELINE INTEGRITY INTERNATIONAL LIMITED | Fixing a geographical reference of a vehicle traveling through a pipeline | 
| 4924450, | Mar 23 1987 | Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. | Ultrasonic ranging and data telemetry system | 
| 5140307, | Dec 25 1989 | Omega Electronics S.A. | Arrangement for timing moving objects | 
| 5144317, | Apr 07 1990 | Rheinbraun Aktiengesellschaft | Method of determining mining progress in open cast mining by means of satellite geodesy | 
| 5155490, | Oct 15 1990 | GPS TECHNOLOGY CORP , A CORP OF TX | Geodetic surveying system using multiple GPS base stations | 
| 5182566, | Oct 02 1991 | GEOsurv, Inc.; Photocompilation PMS, Inc. | Method and apparatus for utilizing a movable GPS antenna for surveying purposes | 
| 5294937, | May 20 1992 | Cable Leakage Technologies | Cable leakage monitoring system | 
| 5557282, | Oct 11 1988 | Exelis Inc | Height finding antenna apparatus and method of operation | 
| 5589631, | Jul 09 1990 | Spring Patents Corporation | Leak detection with non-toxic liquids | 
| 5608428, | Jun 09 1994 | Trilithic, Inc. | Radio frequency leakage detection system for CATV system | 
| 5625150, | Aug 18 1994 | General Electric Company | Integrated acoustic leak detection sensor subsystem | 
| 5777662, | Aug 27 1996 | Comsonics, Inc. | Ingress/egress management system | 
| 6005518, | Dec 31 1997 | Coaxial cable RF leakage detector | |
| 6009334, | Nov 26 1997 | TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET L M ERICSSON PUBL | Method and system for determining position of mobile radio terminals | 
| 6018358, | Jun 09 1994 | Trilithic, Inc. | Radio frequency leakage detection system for CATV system | 
| 6272350, | Dec 04 1997 | Alcatel Lucent | Method for improved line of sight signal detection using time/frequency analysis | 
| 6307593, | Oct 03 1997 | Wavetek Corporation | Pulsed leakage tagging signal | 
| 6310646, | Nov 29 1996 | Wavetek Corporation | Method and apparatus for measuring a radio frequency signal having program information and control information | 
| 6313874, | Nov 17 1997 | Wavetek Corporation | Method and apparatus for direct detection of communication system leakage signals | 
| 6337711, | Jun 22 1999 | COMSONICS, INC | Transmission performance testing | 
| 6437740, | Apr 27 1999 | Stelx, Inc. | Single receiver wireless tracking system | 
| 6801162, | Apr 16 2003 | Cable Leakage Technologies, Inc.; CABLE LEAKAGE TECHNOLOGIES, INC | Doppler-based automated direction finding system and method for locating cable television signal leaks | 
| 6833859, | Feb 01 1999 | COMSONICS, INC | Method of locating radio frequency leaks in a CATV system | 
| 7116685, | Aug 22 2000 | INTERDIGITAL CE PATENT HOLDINGS; INTERDIGITAL CE PATENT HOLDINGS, SAS | Communication parameter adjustment system in an internet compatible bi-directional communication system | 
| 7548201, | Apr 16 2003 | VIAVI SOLUTIONS, INC | Method and system for automatically analyzing and modifying cable television signal leak information | 
| 7945939, | Jul 20 2005 | Cable Leakage Technologies, Inc.; CABLE LEAKAGE TECHNOLOGIES, INC | Method and system for analyzing cable television signal leak information | 
| 8688532, | Dec 11 2009 | General Motors LLC | Real-time ride share system | 
| 20030022645, | |||
| 20070022457, | |||
| 20080133308, | |||
| 20080167808, | |||
| 20090300534, | 
| Date | Maintenance Fee Events | 
| Dec 17 2018 | REM: Maintenance Fee Reminder Mailed. | 
| Apr 02 2019 | M2551: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 4th Yr, Small Entity. | 
| Apr 02 2019 | M2554: Surcharge for late Payment, Small Entity. | 
| Jan 26 2022 | BIG: Entity status set to Undiscounted (note the period is included in the code). | 
| Oct 03 2022 | M1552: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 8th Year, Large Entity. | 
| Date | Maintenance Schedule | 
| Apr 28 2018 | 4 years fee payment window open | 
| Oct 28 2018 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) | 
| Apr 28 2019 | patent expiry (for year 4) | 
| Apr 28 2021 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) | 
| Apr 28 2022 | 8 years fee payment window open | 
| Oct 28 2022 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) | 
| Apr 28 2023 | patent expiry (for year 8) | 
| Apr 28 2025 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) | 
| Apr 28 2026 | 12 years fee payment window open | 
| Oct 28 2026 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) | 
| Apr 28 2027 | patent expiry (for year 12) | 
| Apr 28 2029 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |